• Add Review
  • Subscribe
  • Nominate
  • Submit Media
  • RSS

Really cool puzzle concept, but too short, and with a generic story

  • Gretgor
  • 12/14/2020 11:10 PM
  • 523 views
I found this game in the review request topic of RMN, as I went there to request reviews for my own game.

I have a policy where, whenever I request reviews for a game, I review two other games with zero reviews on the topic. This game was tagged as "logic puzzle," which is way up my alley, so I decided to get it. Was it worthwhile? Let's find out.

SETTING AND STORY

In Alchemistress Vivi, you play as the eponymous female alchemist exploring the ruins of a mysterious dark magic temple on the edge of a swamp, aided by her mysterious friend Metin. As you enter the temple, you discover the magic within the temple is still very much alive, and you need to use your own skills in magic and alchemy to get through the many obstacles the temple presents.

This foreboding setting is really nice and tantalizing, and it made me excited to look deep into the secrets the temple hides. So, does the development of the story itself do it justice? Without spoiling much, here are my impressions.

The story is rather empty to say the least. There's nothing in the way of character arcs or interesting developments. You just get to the end of the dungeon, face an evil boss, and then the game ends in a rather predictable plot twist.

So yeah, I feel like the story could have been a lot better. It feels like it's just tacked on for the sake of motivating the gameplay. Even then, however, it feels like there is a disconnect between story and gameplay. What sense does it make to just lose a life while trying to open up a magical barrier? I mean, it'd make sense if there was, I dunno, a monster that hits you every few attempts or something, but as it is, the lives system feels tacked on, unless there are monsters around, which is not always the case.

PRESENTATION

The presentation outside of the puzzles consists mostly of highly detailed backdrops, some objects showing up in these backdrops, and text messages on the bottom on the screen. The backdrops are cool, and the character portraits are nice. It's got a visual novel vibe, without visual novel "gameplay."

The graphics in the puzzles themselves are simple but effective. I like that we get a nice bust portrait of Vivien to go with it. She's quite good looking, I gotta say.

The music is absolutely kickass. It just works very well with the atmosphere and is very interesting overall.

I have no idea how much of the graphics and music are RTP, and how much is original stuff, but suffice to say it all works well. The presentation is good, that's what matters.

GAMEPLAY

This game consists of a linear sequence of alchemy puzzles in between story bits. The puzzles are all about attempting to cast a spell by arranging magical potions in a certain order. You have to gradually unveil the solution to each puzzle by trying different combinations until you reach the desired result. The only clue you get is the number of different items to use, and how many items you got right (either in position or in type) in each attempt.

So, is it a logic puzzle, or is it a trial and error puzzle? I'd say it is both. You need to apply logic to figure out what the result of every combination is telling you, but you also need to experiment to know what you're doing right or wrong. It is a really cool system, with an interesting idea behind it.

Admittedly, the game took a while to click with me. I guess my dumb monkey brain wasn't ready to think about things in the level this game requires us to. It felt annoying to have to restart whenever I ran out of attempts before figuring out the solution, and I felt like I was at the mercy of luck for the most part.

That is, until the game "clicked" with me. Then it became awesome and exhilarating. As I learned to plan my experiments carefully and intelligently, the game became a very satisfying experience, and I gradually unveiled the solution to each puzzle by analyzing the results of previous experiments against one another.

It is, in my experience, the closest a puzzle concept has ever gotten to translating the scientific method into gameplay, in that it involves both experimentation and analyzing the experiments against previously obtained knowledge.

Still, even after the game clicked, I feel like the amount of attempts we're given is not enough to figure out the puzzle sometimes, so there is still a bit of a luck factor involved. Not enough to ruin the game, but definitely enough to make the "insane" difficulty level be complete BS. Maybe having a few more attempts would make the game perfect, but I dunno.

Overlong irrelevant tangent in spoiler tags:


I wonder what the minimum number of attempts necessary to deduce the solution with absolute certainty is. I have no idea what that number would be, nor what the proof of such a number would even look like, but it got me thinking. Is this game based on an existing combinatorial puzzle I'm not aware of?

If we think of the possible positionings of stuff as a 4x6 grid, with the rows being the positions and the columns being the potions, then we can think of the solution to the puzzle as crossing out four points in that grid, one in each row. If for every current point in an experiment, it is possible to eliminate at least four points from the grid, then 6 attempts should be enough to figure out any puzzle. However, is it really possible to do that? I don't know, to be honest.

21 is an obvious upper bound for the number, since it is always possible to eliminate at least one possibility, so after you eliminate 20 positions in your grid, your next attempt should get you the solution. Still, I think we can do better.

I dunno, really. I feel way out of my depth here. Is this super obvious and I just don't get it? I mean, it's trivial to find the full set of potions needed (but not their order) in 6 attempts, but the order itself is a lot harder.


OVERALL

So the presentation is cool, and the gameplay has a cool concept that takes a while to click, but when it does click, it's awesome. The story, however, is forgettable at best.

Also, the game is rather short, with only a handful of puzzles before you reach the final boss. This game would have benefitted immensely from more opportunities to engage with its core mechanic. You know what I think would be cool? An endless mode, say, where you lose one life when you fail, and gain a number of lives according to how many attempts you have left every time you succeed, I dunno, something like that.

Still, all in all, I think this is a 3.5/5. It would have been much better with either more puzzles or a better story.

Posts

Pages: 1
Hello and thank you for this review as well. To get two reviews in such a short period of time for one game is a huge honor for me.

I like the idea of the additional game mode you described at the end of your review. Maybe I'll add something like that at some point. It shouldn't be hard to do that, as the core mechanics are there. Just have to mess around with it a little bit.

@irrelevant tangent in spoiler tags: I had fun reading this and think about it. I don't know exactly how many attempts would be needed in purely mathematical terms to find out a combination with absolute sureness. Considering the game is largely inspired by Mastermind and knowing a code of Mastermind can be solved in a maximum of 5 attempts, I think it's quite similar here. Presumably, in my game, there are less attempts needed, if you think carefully, as there are usually less items that can occur in a sequence.
Pages: 1